Thursday, May 1, 2025
Blog Page 184

“You write things and get lucky”: In conversation with screenwriter John Hodge

0

Although you may not know John’s name, you’ll certainly know his work. Having written the screenplays for Trainspotting, The Beach, A Life Less Ordinary, and T2 Trainspotting, as well as the script for Olivier-award-winning play Collaborators, he is the creative genius behind some seminal British entertainment. Far from a jaded Hollywood veteran, John is a man who speaks with admirable modesty, and whose tangents are peppered with pearls of wisdom. His success, he tells me, is the product of luck and perseverance: “You write things and get lucky, but luck is kind of difficult to come by.”

John’s interest in writing began while he was at school. He wrote his first sketches while in 6th form. However, after choosing to study medicine at the University of Edinburgh, John’s move into the creative industry was a leap of faith, requiring him to choose a pursuit of passion over a stable career. He tells me that what drew him to study medicine was the duration of the course, since “the more time at university, the better”, and whilst he “didn’t really enjoy the course much”, he wrote for Edinburgh’s student paper and performed sketches at his Medics’ Ball. 

He says, “I went through my degree and started working as a doctor and put all that [creative interest] behind me. I got through some postgraduate exams, but then in my mid 20s I thought to myself, ‘I enjoyed scriptwriting in high school, so I’ll have a go at this. And if it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t work out.’ But I knew I would really like to write a film script. And that was the extent of my ambition. I didn’t know what this film script I was going to write was going to be about, or anything like that.”

John drew his inspiration from films like the Coen Brothers’ Blood Simple and Steven Soderbergh’s breakthrough film, Sex, Lies, and Videotape. He tells me, “I was really impressed by the way that both those filmmakers created intelligent commercial films, [especially] their use of tension, threat, and ultimately violence in small amounts.”

Exploring “that Sex, Lies, and Videotape route [and] moving pieces around to create tension” is what led John to produce his first script, Shallow Grave. This black comedy crime film, directed by Danny Boyle and starring Ewan McGregor, Christopher Eccleston, and Kerry Fox, was not only a commercial success, but it gave John a springboard from which to launch his career. Subsequently, John set about adapting the script for a film that would become a cultural phenomenon: Trainspotting. This script originated with the magazine shorts and books produced by Irvine Welsh. The novel Trainspotting was first published in 1993, and told the harrowing tale of a group of friends whose lives were wracked by addiction and self-destructive habits. Having lived in Edinburgh and worked as a medic, thus seeing first-hand the devastating effects of heroin addiction and the AIDs epidemic, John was inspired by the content of Welsh’s writing. He tells me, “Edinburgh in the mid-80s was a minor epicentre for the HIV epidemic… the drug taking community all sort of knew each other, so needle sharing, in ignorance, managed to infect a disproportionately large number of people compared to some other cities, so that sort of world was familiar to me. Reading [Irvine’s] book, I was electrified by the characters.”

In creating any script, screenwriters have to immerse themselves fully in their research and become a part of the world that they are writing into existence. When writing a script that deals with painful and traumatic topics, this has the potential to weigh heavily on a writer’s mental state. Trainspotting, which deals with themes ranging from internalised homophobia to infant mortality, is an extreme example of such a script. John tells me that he did indeed find his psyche to be affected by the powerful and gruesome themes he was writing about, so much so that when more producers reached out to ask if he would help with adaptations of similar stories about drug addiction and death, he knew that “there’s no way I wanted to do that”. 

However, he concedes that writing Trainspotting was made easier since he was adapting not just a book about hardship and heroin addiction, but “a book about people in all their glory, in all their wits and humour… I’d much rather do things that have a certain degree of escapism, amusement, stuff like that, because that’s sort of what I like to see. I think there’s a place for a wide spectrum of emotional journeys. And we each have to be responsible for our own.”

Having worked in an industry known for being cutthroat, brutal, and heartless, John’s journey has come with its shares of lows. “I was fired from James Bond. I was working with Danny Boyle on it, and we were dumped, but I don’t feel bad about that. You know, I was well paid for the work I did.”

Ultimately, the decision was pinned on ‘creative differences’, which saw both John and Danny Boyle removed from the film.“The way it happened was very Hollywood… I think something happened to do with the script and the rewrite, which was delivered and didn’t satisfy [the producers’] demands. Danny was very supportive. We were going to go meet them, the producers and people from the studio, in New York, to sort of thrash it all out. And I had this feeling that it might not end harmoniously. But I thought, you know what, I was gonna go to New York for a few days at someone else’s expense. So that’s good. The hotel was booked, and I was going to raid the minibar, because again, I thought I might never be coming back. [I was in] the car on my way to Heathrow and the phone rang. It was Danny saying, ‘Now we’re off. That’s it.’ The car turned around. I never got as far as the minibar.

“It was very disappointing, and you felt hurt at the time, but it’s really not bad. My overall experience [in the industry] has been great. When I started out [in medicine], a doctor said to me, ‘What you really want, John, is a job where you don’t need to go to work each day’. That’s what I’ve had for nearly 30 years now.”

John admits that for young people starting off in a creative career, these setbacks might be too much to take. His only advice is perseverance, and the magic ingredient – luck. “I feel like there should be some secret that everyone who’s in the business knows. There isn’t really. It’s just tough. And it can be very depressing. Be prepared to be depressed. To feel sort of lost. And like you’ve made a big mistake.”

Finding another aspiring creative at a similar stage in their career can be a liferaft, according to John. “Meet someone who you trust and who you like, and who has similar ambitions and complementary views, so you get to go through this journey together, because there’s a lot of knockbacks.”

Having made it over the many barriers to success and achieved many incredible accolades, John maintains that he has managed to evade the scrutiny that has arisen in the age of social media. He says of the height of his fame: “it was fine. It never caused any problems for me. I was never recognised in the street or anything like that. And it was an age before social media, so these were more innocent times. But once I went to the Musee d’Orsay – No one knows the name of the scriptwriters here in Britain, but you go to France and it’s different – I went to the Musee d’Orsay, handed over my bank card as deposit for the audio guide, and [the receptionist] looked at it and said, “Oh, you wrote Le Tombeau de la Terreur, which was the French title of Shallow Grave. So that was nice. I think I still paid for the audio guide, though.

“But I worked on The Beach [with] Leonardo DiCaprio in the immediate post-Titanic fervour that surrounded the guy. And he dealt [with the attention] very well, but by keeping a distance. I think that’s what they have to do: they have to put up barriers between themselves and the outer world, which is a shame. And of course, putting up barriers for a long time can do things to someone.”

The celebrity culture that John has avoided is playing a bigger role than ever in the new Age of Netflix. With the appeal of new films often focusing around the glossy stars they can attract to their roster, and with corporations like Disney hiring whole teams of screenwriters for any one script, the authenticity of the art of screenwriting has arguably suffered.

“Cinema is sort of dying,” John tells me. Instead, in the eyes of scriptwriters who want to maintain their own style and voice, “everything’s for television”.

However, modern ‘binge’ culture has, in John’s opinion, taken its toll on this form of writing too. “It becomes more like manufacturing, you know; the sort of television equivalent of the Model T Ford. Your manufacturing process creates a more reliable product, or products that are more predictable. The end product is good, and then that’s fine. It works. But it’s just… it’s just different.”

This isn’t to say that John doesn’t still find immense enjoyment in crafting new scripts. He notes that one of his proudest creations was the sequel to Trainspotting. He says, “It was not as successful as Trainspotting – it’s not as exciting a film. And I’m totally okay with that. It was never conceived of as something that would be as exciting as Trainspotting, for the very simple reason that the characters are in their 40s. Life in your 40s is not as exciting as it is when you’re 21. It just isn’t. And there’s no point in pretending otherwise. And so it’s an inherently depressing film, because it’s a film about ageing, and nostalgia. 

“Obviously, the phenomenon of Trainspotting and being involved in that was a big part of my life. So the the act of going back to that with the same people 20 odd years later was quite emotional. This was more or less due to the privilege of working with these great actors. I thought they were just all fantastic. And it was so easy to write [the script] because I had their voices in my head. And it was just a pleasure. [The] same crew worked on the film who’d worked on the original 20 years before. Of course, the film carried its own stresses and hassles and everything with that. That’s just taken as read. But I just really felt really privileged to be involved in that again, it was great.” 

If one thing is for sure, it’s that whilst John may have struck gold with a generation-defining film script in his early years as a writer, he hasn’t lost his touch. As for what we can expect to see from him in the future, he tells me: “I’m developing a film with Danny [Boyle]. We’ll see what happens with that.”

The ugly truth about pretty privilege

0

CW: Eating disorders, racism, body dysmorphia, references to sexual violence.

Before I begin, I’d like to say thank you to all students that interacted with the forms and polls that were released to gather information for this article. To those of you that are struggling with the issues addressed in this article, please seek help from your college welfare supporters or the University’s welfare service. The appropriate contact details are below.

Charlie’s Angels (2000). A film made from an old-school TV show about gorgeous women spies. What’s the tactic? To take advantage of the fact that men are unsuspecting of beautiful women, making them the perfect spies. Whilst this nurtured an adoration for films and was somewhat empowering for young Sahar, watching it recently, I’ve realised that this is a prime example of pretty privilege. Yes, I’m basing this article off of a cheesy 2000s film that was probably my queer awakening, however, it doesn’t remove from the fact that pretty privilege not only exists but has a deep-seated place in Oxford. Growing up with films like this in conjunction with ideas of what it was to be “pretty” or conventionally attractive – and more the fact that this was not what I looked like – I was taught that pretty privilege was just the way that the world works. This didn’t change when I matriculated, even though  my relationship with my appearance improved, and I would come to realise, especially in a context where I was expected to be more outgoing, that there were moments in which I would be overlooked in the “attraction” department. 

I started writing this article as part of an exploration as to whether anyone else felt like this as well. It turned into a revelation about how prevalent pretty privilege is at Oxford. 70% of people that responded to our Instagram poll recognised that pretty privilege is a problem and 34% even acknowledged that they’d been positively affected by it. It’s safe to say that most people can at least come up with a definition for it:

“For me, pretty privilege means greater freedom and social opportunities”

“Pretty privileged to me is being treated like you’re worth more than others, just because of appearances”

I think you get it.

Pretty privilege has a diverse impact on Oxford students, not only in the way that it is advantageous for certain people but also in how very many students oppressively feel it in their lives here. Of course, where most people feel it most is in the dating scene:

“I got into my first and only proper relationship at the big age of 19. I never thought I was pretty enough to have a partner.”

Before I carry on, I want to linger on this statement for a minute. A lot of the time, you’ll hear an Oxford student say that they never dated or were in a relationship before university because they were working or studying. Therefore, when we get to Oxford (especially in Michaelmas term of first year), the overwhelming pressure to get with the person to your left can be incredibly terrifying when you haven’t, first, addressed possible factors that will have knocked your confidence in the dating scene that can be attributed to pretty privilege. Now, I’m not saying that everyone who has said this has the same experience, but I also want us to realise that it is possible for these things to come hand in hand. One response, even without naming pretty privilege, showed how this was strikingly present in dating apps:

“Once, I was added to a group chat of unknown numbers where they made fun of my appearance… There’s a reason I don’t use dating apps. I don’t know what pretty privilege is, but it’s probably avoiding that harassment.”

Whilst dating apps can be used to facilitate healthy and long-term relationships and romantic interactions, I don’t think we acknowledge how often they facilitate pretty privilege when someone is only deciding to go on a date with you based on your appearance. After a conversation with a friend, we also realised that the reason we felt so insecure on dating apps was because we didn’t fit into the cookie-cutter image that appealed to most others on it. These people shared this experience:

“I feel like people overlook me, before they get to know me”

“There are moments that you remember yourself, and you realise that you’re not attractive here. This is not your space to be loved or appreciated for the way you look.”

“it just feels like men often don’t want a woman who is bigger than them – they want someone small and slim and kind of dainty?”

Dating apps, completely based around pictures with “a few questions” to keep up the pretence of connecting people through their personalities, exacerbate so many issues around body image such as body dysmorphia and possibly even eating disorders – especially as a woman because of the way that the heterosexual dating scene expects women to fit a certain image for the sake of men. A couple of interviewees who identified as queer described how pretty privilege seems to exist less frequently in the LGBTQ+ scene at Oxford; “embracing the queerness” of their appearances – in the way that they didn’t fit into the male gaze – allowed them to become more confident with themselves and alleviated the pressures to look a certain way. However, unfortunately, the queer scene is not immune to the influence of pretty privilege. This was a heart-breaking response to our google form:

“I think all of these issues with body image and the lack of plus size people in Oxford is heightened in the queer scene – it feels like there’s a cookie cutter image of what “queer” looks like at this uni and that’s often very skinny and white. The only place that I’ve actually been verbally assaulted about my weight in Oxford is in the gay club Plush, on several occasions by queer men/nbs who have shouted things like “fat bitch” and worse at me while I’m just dancing with my friends or trying to get out there in the queer scene and meet someone.”

“As a queer woman, I feel particularly insecure when getting with other queer women/I feel myself comparing myself more which is stupid”

This need to be more “feminine” might not be as present amongst the queer community here, but it still presents itself when queer students “seem to care about the male gaze much more than the female gaze”. One student also said that, regardless of how feminine they were, they were worried that they weren’t “‘gay enough’ for women.” Pretty privilege also presents itself in the queer scene through the way that it affects trans and non-binary students:

“It’s difficult navigating dating – wanting to be seen as attractive and seen as my gender can feel at odds with each other. I worry I am only considered attractive when I’m not being seen as my gender.”

“Trans women especially I’ve seen be more likely to be misgendered and mistreated if they aren’t deemed attractive or feminine enough to “pass”. 

Whilst the queer scene can serve as some sort of an escape from cis and heteronormative standards of beauty, there are still people within this community that hold these values. 

I also received an overwhelming percentage of  written responses from people of colour. Before I show them to you, I want to give you a quote from Candice Carty-Williams’ Queenie came to me when I read these responses: “You know, when we go out, my friends get chatted up by guys who say, ‘I’d love to take you for dinner, and in the same breath they come over to me, put their hands on my bum and tell me they want to take me back to theirs and fuck me”.  I think it perfectly encompasses the disparity that is felt between the treatment of people of colour and white people, especially in the dating scene. The only thing that I would add is the way that there were other people of colour who these same guys would overlook. These were a couple of other responses that I received:

I’ve never dated so I wouldn’t know, but I’ve low-key accepted that I might be single for the duration of my degree, because I think it’s harder to date as a POC here. Not only do I worry about not meeting the beauty standard, I do want to meet someone who’ll like me for me, and not fetishise me.”

Look around and ask why so many beautiful beautiful WOC are passed over in Oxford compared to fairly average-looking blonde upper-class counterparts – there are exceptions but it’s so weird to see attractive people at uni regularly discussed without anyone mentioning this.”

I’m sure at this point you’ll have noticed that I’ve focussed  a lot on the dating scene at Oxford. This is, in part, because many of those who responded to my survey  would bring up how they’ve been impacted by pretty privilege in Oxford without prompting. It is also because I think that the impacts of pretty privilege are exacerbated and demonstrated more strongly in the prominence of the dating scene in Oxford. It is a brilliant demonstration of how those who benefit from pretty privilege receive more attention or free drinks based on the way that they look.

When asked about how others have experienced pretty privilege, this was a common response that I received:

“A lot of people who have pretty privilege don’t particularly like to admit it, I’ve found they like what they get from it. It’s not a bad thing and it makes a lot of sense, no one would pass up the opportunity realistically” 

This is a really difficult problem to be faced with because when someone benefits from pretty privilege, they may not realise it because being given a free drink or a discount by someone who likes the way you look could easily be interpreted as that person “just being nice”. They may not even see themselves as pretty and won’t see it as pretty privilege in the first place. But someone else may step up behind them, not as conventionally attractive, and get a nod before they’re charged the full price for the same thing. It’s a sure way to strike down someone’s confidence especially when no-one around you can see what all of these people have done wrong. A lot of the time, it comes across as confidence or sociability:

“Friends who are absolutely beautiful with regard to conventional beauty standards tend to make friends more easily I think – they never EVER acknowledge that their appearance has anything to do with this though” 

It can take time to realise this. When you first find these friends, it seems as though they’re just confident. It’s inspiring! They serve as role models to boost your own confidence and need to be outgoing. Suddenly, one day, the penny drops. The likelihood is that their confidence comes hand in hand with the fact that they’ve not had to scrutinise every physical aspect of themselves to get what they want. For example, one interviewee described how she internalised people’s opinion that her afro-textured hair would be “taking up too much space”. As a result of this, she became aware of how her personality took up too much space. The same has been said by interviewees that felt self-conscious about their weight:

“Being overweight naturally means you take up more space so I have a fear of taking up even more space ‘than necessary’.”

It’s a frustrating never-ending cycle of both external and internal bias surrounding your appearance which means that whether or not we fit into the frame of “pretty” also has a huge impact on our confidence. Even if they share their free meal with you, it may not necessarily soften this blow at all.

However, I don’t want to ignore the fact that pretty privilege is not costly to those who might benefit from it. For example, one person brought up how, whilst she has benefited from economic pretty privilege (in receiving gifts etc.), she has felt that she has suffered from “the beauty penalty as a woman in an academic setting” because “if there’s a woman who got somewhere high up, yeah, they either slept their way to the top, flirted their way to the top, or somebody liked the look of them and wanted them to hang around”. Some people also discussed how being pretty opened you up to sexual violence:

“If you’re a woman then [pretty privilege] is sort of balanced out by the fact that you’re going to get catcalled and objectified and have a sexual harassment and sexual violence like that.”

Prettiness can also be distorted for non-binary and trans students:

“For afab non-binary people – people such as myself, it can be the other way around and “prettiness” becomes less of a privilege, as it is often be tied to being misgendered as a woman.”

This has been a difficult article to write because, honestly, it seems like there’s no winning, and the only truth that I’ve found in this is that these qualities, these conventions of pretty privilege benefit one person and one person only and that is the (usually straight) tall, athletic, rich, white, blonde man that we all see as the Oxford poster boy.

Well, what’s our solution to all of this? One of my interviewees highlighted that this is not something that can be measurable in the same way that a company could measure how many employees are women/people of colour/non-binary people. However, just because this is not a measurable bias, this should not be your response:

“It isn’t gonna stop, so grit your teeth and bare it”

Please don’t let this stick with you, despite the “doom and gloom” feeling of this article so far. Yes, we’ve seen that pretty privilege exists and that Oxford is not immune to it. I don’t want to let the pedestaled image of the Oxford poster boy damage your confidence any more than it has already. We didn’t let that guy stop us from getting here, we didn’t let him stop us from studying the subject that we love, hating the texts we have to read (thanks Milton), or the tute sheet that’s staring at you from your desk. Please! What authority does he have to make you look in the mirror and hate yourself? Or stop you from having a boogie at the musicals night at the Bullingdon, auditioning for your favourite play, or asking out that person you’ve been ogling at in the RadCam? The best takeaway that I’ve had from these surveys and interviews is that people have felt more able to express their individuality in Oxford. Yes, this place was made for that poster boy, the man who can give you a charming smile or will promise his entire trust fund to the “thin sexy hooker virgin with boobs and hips but not big ones”(see Leading Lady Parts, BBC on Youtube). But look around you. We’re not all Keira Knightley or Jonathan Bailey but nor should we be. If this sermon didn’t do it for you from yet another student journalist, then try my favourite pieces of advice that some of our interviewees would give their Fresher/Term1 self:

“Oxford is a bubble and other people’s perceptions of you don’t matter! Everyone is beautiful”

“Don’t stress about your appearance, there’s not much you can do about it. Just be grateful for what you have, think of all the things you like about your appearance and focus on being your best self. A beautiful personality goes a long way :))”

Stick that on a Fresher’s T-Shirt. 

Support information:

For student counselling services please email: [email protected].

Nightline: 01865 270 270

Sexual harrassment support service: supportservice@danselinger

Image credit: W.S. Luk

Oxford to continue Ukraine Scholarship with funding from XTX Markets

0

Oxford’s Graduate Scholarship Programme for Ukrainians has been extended for another year and will be jointly funded with the trading firm XTX Markets, who are contributing £602,550 from their Academic Sanctuaries Fund. The scholarship will fund up to 18 graduates in the next academic year. 

Successful applicants will have the entirety of their course fees covered and will receive a £10,000 grant for living expenses. Alongside that, colleges will also provide free meals and accommodation. 

The scholarship is aimed at well-qualified Ukrainian graduates who were badly affected by the ongoing war – students displaced from neighbouring countries as a result of the war may be considered too. 

Oxford initially announced the scholarship last May following the Russian invasion, continuing a long-established tradition of commitment to supporting refugees. For 2022/23, the programme was co-funded by the university and the participating colleges. Since then, 26 graduates have received the scholarship and been welcomed into Oxford.

Professor Lionel Tarassenko, President of Reuben College, devised this scholarship and said: “Like everyone else, I was horrified when the conflict started in late February, and immediately began to think about how best to help the people of Ukraine. Having been an academic in the University for the past 34 years, I had no doubt that Oxford could play its part in supporting students fleeing from the conflict. 

He continued: “The funding from XTX Markets is the first step towards making the scheme sustainable, at a time when all universities are facing serious financial challenges.” 

Simon Coyle, the Head of Philanthropy at XTX Markets, said: “XTX Markets is delighted to be funding the University of Oxford to expand its Graduate Scholarships for Ukraine, supporting people displaced by the war in Ukraine. 

“We are encouraged that this programme will focus on supporting students who can help Ukraine build back better, in this case by providing one-year master’s courses in areas that are crucial to reconstruction, including energy systems, medicine and science.”

Myroslava Hartmond, the programme coordinator, said: “Seeing the programme come to life has been emotional for me. I was born in Ukraine and first came to Oxford in 1995, when I was just five years old to join my academic father Andrij Halushka at Worcester College (one of the first Ukrainians to study and teach in the UK). 

“When I arrived, I didn’t speak any English and missed my mother every single day, but the opportunities that waited for me in the UK made it all worthwhile. Today, my mother Natasha is here with me, and we are proud to be a part of a visible Ukrainian community. As our scholars adjust to the demands of an Oxford degree, it feels deeply rewarding to see them thrive, not just as individuals, but as a community.”

Staff left with “no choice” as 18 day strike planned for February

0

Oxford University staff are set to go on strike for 18 days between the months of February and March in a move organised by the University and College Union (UCU). In a decision announced by the UCU earlier this week, they will be among 70,000 others at 150 universities nation-wide to take industrial action in response to concerns over pay, working conditions, and pensions. 

Aiming to have a greater impact than the three days of UCU strikes last November, the Union’s upcoming walkout marks “an unprecedented programme of escalating strike action” causing widespread disruption.  

While precise dates are yet to be confirmed, UCU members taking part will include lecturers, tutors, researchers, and other staff – some 11% of the professional body of the university. Their demands come in the light of what the UCU general secretary Jo Grady termed “over a decade of falling pay, rampant insecure employment practices and devastating pension cuts”, as well as the increasing pressures of the current cost of living crisis. 

As a result of this, the union has called for widespread reform. In a statement issued by the organisation, disruption may be mitigated if the “vast wealth of the sector” was redistributed by university vice-chancellors – something Oxford’s newly appointed Vice Chancellor Irene Tracey touched upon in her admission ceremony earlier last week. 

Describing staff as “the lifeblood of any university”, Tracey announced plans to commission a new, independent review of pay, pensions and working conditions in order to “support staff during these difficult financial times and to be an attractive place to work in the future”. 

Despite this, a UCU representative told Cherwell: “we expect the University to attempt to downplay our industrial action and are extremely grateful for the support and solidarity we have received from students during this dispute, particularly during November’s action.”

In a statement to Cherwell on staff pensions and pay, David Chivall (Vice President of the Oxford branch of the UCU) asked the University to “stick to the commitment that it made in 2018 to ‘seek to provide pension provision for USS members employed by the University that is of the same standard as currently available.’

He told Cherwell:  Last year, the University failed to support a UCU proposal which would have prevented the employer body Universities UK forcing through an unnecessary and unjustified ~35% cut to our guaranteed future retirement income. USS has always been a healthy scheme and even its own flawed valuation methods show that the scheme is very much in surplus: there is no reason not to restore our pensions.

“On pay, we’re disappointed that the University continues to hide behind the employer’s body, UCEA. The cost of living crisis is now so acute that individual departments are having to make their own adjustments, such as giving staff a lunch allowance. We welcome the comments of the new Vice-Chancellor during her Admission Ceremony to ‘shift the needle in your quality of life so that you can continue to deliver your best performance.’ We urge the University to publicly call for UCEA to make a pay offer that that will shift the needle in our quality of life in the right direction. A below inflation pay uplift can only make things worse.”

The 4-5% pay rise offered by the University and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) on Wednesday 11th was just that, and has consequently been slammed by the UCU as “not enough”. Given its position at 9% below the current Retail Price Index (RPI), Chivall criticised the UCEA for “effectively asking HE professionals to work an entire month without pay this year compared to last. This comes on top of a decade of pay cuts which mean staff are effectively working unpaid for three months a year compared to 10 years ago.”

In the light of previous criticisms that “real change” had been moving at a “glacial pace”, the UCU’s Jo Grady has stated that the “clock is now ticking for the sector to produce a deal or be hit with widespread disruption throughout spring”. 

While the Oxford branch of the UCU has expressed regret at the extent of the industrial action members of the union felt compelled to take, it believes they were left with “no choice”. “We have been forced to announce further strike days because of the failure of employers to engage seriously with the damage caused in recent years”.

For some Oxford students this would mean losses yet greater than the predicted 41% cut in contact hours unlikely to be rescheduled this February and March.  

Among the near 2.5 million other students across the country to be affected by staff strikes for the second time since November, students at the University of Oxford have expressed frustration at the ongoing situation and their position as “collateral damage” in the disputes. 

For those with upcoming Moderations or Final Exams, the consequences of the lack of teaching are likely to be particularly severe. In conversation with Cherwell, one student expressed concern that the university was not doing enough to mitigate the impact of the strikes on students in the form of hourly compensation.

When approached for comment, the university told Cherwell: “We note the recent announcement from UCU on further strike action in February and March. We await formal notification from UCU of their intentions, and will update staff and students once we have the details.”

Oxford Blues have grey day against England Under-20s

0

After the sacking of England rugby men’s coach Eddie Jones, the men’s rugby Blues were the first team to face an England side under the leadership of new Director of Rugby Steve Borthwick. Fresh from their tour of South Africa, as well as strong results against invitational sides like Major Stanley’s XV, how would the hosts fare against a team consisting of England’s brightest prospects? 

In short, they wouldn’t fare particularly well. Despite the England side having a winger shown a yellow for a challenge in the air after just three minutes, the Blues couldn’t exploit their advantage and went down 7-0 after a grubber kick was unsuccessfully dealt with. A few minutes later, a scuffed clearance from Oxford fly-half Harry Bridgewater was punished with maximum efficiency by the English youngsters, taking the score to 14-0. As the first half drew on, the England Under-20s dominated set pieces and were remarkably solid in defence, limiting the Uni side’s attacking threat considerably. 

The second half began with utter dominance from the England Under-20s, but was met with solid Blues resistance. Big hits from prop Michael Fankah, as well as the discipline led by captain and Harlequins pro Tom Osborne, saw the Blues grow into the game slightly. However, after 18 minutes, the first points of the half were scored when the English youth side were rewarded for their dominance- realistically ending Oxford’s chance of getting a result. England added a further two tries, ending the game with a fantastic example of expansive attacking rugby. 

In some ways, a 33-0 defeat to the England Under-20s is to be expected. When looking at the former England Under-20 internationals, from World Player of the Year Maro Itoje to current captain Owen Farrell, it is no mean feat to get a result against the youth side. Yet, although facing a solid and well-drilled defence, the Blues will be thoroughly disappointed not to get any points on the board. The Blues’ backline too often looked flustered under the pressure from England, limiting opportunities to create attacking opportunities. 

Having said that, despite the result, there were a number of positives in the day. After selling over 2,000 tickets, the East and West stands were both full, as well as a thick crowd standing pitchside. If there was any doubt that students were becoming apathetic towards university-wide sports teams, this would dispel that. With cheap beer and cheap food also on offer, popping down to Iffley Road to back the Blues was a great way to spend a Saturday afternoon. Regardless of the result. 

Image: Tom Farmer

Glass Onion Review: Those ‘Knives’ Need Sharpening

Beware, contains spoilers!

“Well, here’s another clue for you all:

The walrus was Paul.”

So jeers John Lennon in The Beatles’s “Glass Onion”, a song plied with red herrings to laugh at those who read far too much into the band’s lyrics. 

Rian Johnson’s Glass Onion, which was released on Netflix in December, the sequel to the well-regarded (thoughperhaps too much so) 2019 Knives Out, refuses successful detective work by the spectator. With twists, turns, and flashbacks, the viewer is never given the opportunity to believe that they could work out the mystery. 

Miles Bron (Edward Norton) is a Zuckerberg-Musk-esque tech billionaire who invites a star-studded group of old friends to his private island for a murder mystery game, where he will be play-murdered. But, surprise! In the first (and most obvious) of the film’s promised twists, the game is quickly cut off and a real murder occurs instead. In fact, there are several, including one before the time of the film starts. 

And who is there to solve the case? Daniel Craig’s drawling southern Benoît Blanc, of course. With the help of a handy ‘twin’ device (played by Janelle Monáe), we find out through the course of the film the motives of each character on the island, and finally who is the murderer, in a lengthy final scene culminating in the Mona Lisa burning to ashes. Gone is the eerie and autumnal Art Deco of the first film, and instead is stifling heat and swimming pools. 

Johnson’s plot borrows heavily from—if not pillages—Agatha Christie. The concept of a cast of eccentric characters stuck together on an island is not new (see And Then There Were None, 1939), nor is the opening declaration of a death before it has happened (see A Murder is Announced, 1950). Glass Onion is rife with intrigue and clever ideas, yet, if we were to raise Christie up from the dead to give Johnson a few pointers, I think she would advise the following: 

Firstly, spend more time with each character individually. 

Caricaturing Elon Musk, Norton’s Miles Bron turns out simply bland in comparison. His group of friends is not much more compelling. Despite a clever, and quite literally ‘on the nose,’ scene in which the politics of each of the characters is demonstrated by their mask-wearing style (the film is set in May 2020), the men’s rights activist (Dave Bautista), scientist (Leslie Odom Jr.), and corrupt politician (Kathryn Hahn) do not develop much further from their introduction. Their possible motives are identical and vague: save their own career by backing the rich guy, and not the truth. An oddly-integrated mix, the friendship of the self-described ‘Disruptors’ is hard to believe, and the dynamics appear much weaker than the intriguingly dysfunctional family of the first Knives Out. The film mocks its characters, but we have no reason to care. 

Secondly, allow the viewer to believe they can guess the culprit (even if they will inevitably be wrong.)

Johnson seems to laugh at the watcher. A third of the way in, he pulls us back: none of what you just saw was the whole truth. An element of the viewer’s trust is lost as previous scenes are peeled back to reveal missed dialogue. The basis of the ‘murder mystery’ genre is eclipsed by clever scene cutting and a self-referential script which claps itself on the back (“Stop these malapropisms!” Blanc reflects on Bron’s previous lines.) Anything from this point on could still be a lie, for all we know. 

Finally… the twist is based around a twin, really?

The film is certainly entertaining and flashy enough to fill its 139 minutes, yet for all its cleverness, perhaps it needs to go back to Agatha Christie a bit. 

Linacre College proposes new charitable governance statutes in light of Thao dispute

0

Linacre College has proposed changes to its governance statutes which would see the creation of a Board of Trustees with duties including the management of charitable donations. The board would be comprised of up to seven members of the Governing Body, a junior research fellow, the President of the common room and up to three independent trustees “currently unconnected to the College (but who may include emeriti, alumni or those with professional expertise relevant to the business of the College)”.

Linacre College website states that “The Trustee Board has responsibility for ensuring the College is properly run and fit for purpose.” Other new statutes should regulate the ‘Powers of the College’, ‘Application of Income and Assets’, ‘Conflicts of Interest and Loyalty’ and ‘Meetings and Decisions of the Governing Body’.  

 The current statutes were created in 1986 and are “out of date”, according to an announcement in the Oxford Gazette. The new statues have been updated to “to enable the College to meet the high governance standards expected of a major modern educational charity”, a website announcement reads. 

These changes come after the college signed a Memorandum of Understanding on the 31st of October 2021 with SOVICO Group represented by its chairwoman Madam Nguyen Thi Phuong Thao to receive a donation of £155 million. The donation has proved controversial with Oxford University Campaign for Climate Justice, who criticised SOVICO’s association with the Russian oil company Zarubezhneft. As part of the Memorandum with Linacre, Madam Thao has committed the SOVICO Group to carbon net zero by 2050. SOVICO’s other commercial involvements include offshore oil and gas exploration, as well as Vietjet Air, Vietnam’s first privately-owned airline.

The deal has courted further controversy relating to the college’s application to the Privy Council to change its name to ‘Thao College’. Head of Alumni Relations and Development at Linacre Lisa Smårs acknowledged that she had received emails expressing “sadness, or even anger” when the proposed name change was announced in 2021. Writing on the college website, Smårs said that “however important our name is to us, I believe that the values we represent are of far greater importance”, citing other colleges that had been renamed following donations.

Concerns were raised by Julian Lewis MP that Thao was “extremely close to the Vietnamese Communist Government” during a debate on the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill in the Commons. On 13th June 2022, then Education minister Michelle Donelan announced she was ‘actively investigating’ the deal between Linacre College and SOVICO, but Donelan has since resigned.

Of the total £155 million donation to the college from SOVICO, £40 million has been earmarked for the college endowment fund. Under the new governance statutes, investments, including parts of the endowment, could be managed externally by  ‘a financial expert’, according to a draft of the new statute book, available on Linacre College Website.

‘Not my King’: charges dropped against Oxford activist who spoke against monarchy

0

After shouting “who elected him?” during King Charles’s proclamation ceremony through Oxford, activist Symon Hill was arrested for a public order offence. Cherwell can reveal that the charges made against the alleged anti-monarchist have now been dropped. 

The ceremony that took place at Carfax Tower in September was part of the standard procedure for the assumption of a new monarch. Though, with the death of the country’s longest reigning monarch and for most of the population, the only monarch they’ve known, this was no ordinary proclamation ceremony. Hill told the BBC that he “remained quiet” in the moments that warranted respect for the late Queen. The activist spoke up when King Charles III was declared the new monarch, who is, as Hill commented, “a head of state being imposed on us without our consent”. His protestation, “who elected him?”, resulted in being arrested, a journey in a police van, and four months of legal proceedings. 

The Crown Prosecution Service has now decided to “discontinue the matter” of the charges against Hill just three weeks before the court hearing was expected to take place. This is a success for the wider civil liberty campaign though it is shadowed by the surprising suppression of many individual protests against the monarchy across the UK. The activist stated in an article for Bright Green that the police had become “defensive and refused to talk” when he “expressed a mild criticism of the royal procession”. The police reaction to Hill’s small-scale protest raises further questions of the relationship between state and monarchy, not to mention the notion of a society that welcomes multiple points of view.

The Oxford protest was not singular. There has been a host of republican protests across the country since September, including the billboard campaign ‘#NotMyKing’. The campaign was inspired by a lone protester in London holding a piece of A3 paper of the same phrase; video footage shows she was promptly confronted by at least three police officers. Though, with the tension surrounding Prince Andrew, and more recently, the Royal Family infighting, it is not surprising that the King would feel threatened by growing public discontent. Nevertheless, anti-monarchist troops were rallied and protests against the non-democratic assumption of a new monarch are expected to reach their peak at the coronation on 6 May 2023. 

The nation has an apparently expanding distaste for the monarchy. Though Oxford has its share of republican action, the monarchy remains a strong presence with the King as Visitor at three University colleges. For now, Britain remains hooked on its monarchic tradition.

I tried out college football last term, you should too

0

If you haven’t tried a college sport, have you really gone to Oxford? Well yes, last year’s academic stress and fatigue was enough to say been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Yet people commonly say that getting involved with college sports is the gateway to a good college experience. Like the nosey person I am, I had to see if it was true, and tried out college sports. More specifically, football last term. A term later, I would now say, it’s at least worth a try.

Maybe it’s best to give a little context. There’s not a sporty bone in my body. I watch lots, (some say too much) safe in the knowledge that I can’t catch a ball (or a break) or hit a beach ball with a mattress sized racquet, but I never was too keen on taking part. I peaked in Year 4 with my Essex County sliver in 600m and I hung up the boots then. Since then I’ve been savvy to avoid PE, with conveniently timed music lessons and so on. So back when I was a wide-eyed naive little fresher, you can only imagine my total joy and elation at hearing from almost anybody I spoke to, encouraging me to get involved with college sports. Curious by the high number and various types of people suggesting I do, I took the laborious first step of searching for and joining my college football group on facebook and never took it further than there. Maybe the occasional like of a post letting me know when the training was or telling myself that this term I was going to get involved. 

Spoiler alert: I never did. But it’s not just my chronic laziness that prevented me from doing so. The more of first year that passed along, the more and more negative things I started to hear about college sports. Specifically the side that wasn’t to do with actual sport-ing. The crew dates that went too far, the socials that seemed terrifying. If my lack of sports acquiescence gave me cold feet, the social aspect of it had me turned off.

But when I found myself wheezing a bit too much after walking up one of the numerous flights of college stairs, I decided enough was enough. It was time for me to become a (barely) sporty person. Netball required too much coordination and rugby straight up terrified me, so off to football I went.

And after a term of going, I can say I was definitely not the best at it. But I definitely did try. What I really enjoyed (and did not expect to happen) was meeting the people like me who were also trying something new, and were okay with getting things wrong. The first time I showed up to any practice I was dragging my feet, but once I had gone to one session I started really enjoying it. By the end of term, I was genuinely looking forward to playing. I can’t speak for all colleges or all sports, but I can vouch for my college: it really is worth trying out. All the girls I played with were really nice and supportive, not like the netball girlies (omg netball girlies please don’t take me seriously). This seems to be a general trend from people I spoke to outside of colleges too, not just mine. Even if you are terrible, you can still have a great time taking part. I’ve concluded that horrible people don’t get involved in college sports. 

While the social element seemed a bit intimidating given that it’s not really my scene, it shouldn’t put you off playing. They aren’t going to bind you by your arms and legs and drag you to Jamal’s. If you’re not an extrovert or you don’t really go out much, maybe you might know the names of the people you play with a bit better if you do go out. But from my term I would say that I still enjoyed myself playing, despite the fact that the day I’m sighted at a crew date is the day Phil Mitchell grows some luscious locks. 

That being said, in the interest of being fair here are some of the genuine negatives. 

It really isn’t easy to be good, especially at football. I want to believe that one day I’ll play and my skill will spontaneously appear. But no. Sometimes the ball goes really far away and I internally scream “oh naur!” because I know I have to run after it. Despite all of this, running is still one of the top ten worst things you could put a human through in my personal opinion. Not to mention the awful soreness that comes from my rusty bones after running about for a bit. 

But if anything, I hope that I showed it is, believe it or not, worth it. I’ll go again this term with the hope that the pain of exercise can distract me from the miserable months of hillary. But in all seriousness, if you were on the fence, or have been considering it and thought it was too late to try, it really is never too late and it is always worth it to try a college sport. You don’t have to do football, most colleges do rugby and frisbee- last year I went to watch ice hockey cuppers. And after discovering the university has a team for the totally made-up sport “Eton Fives”, anything is possible. it’s worth having a look at what else you could try.

As for me, provided I don’t score an own goal next term, I’ll consider myself proud! As someone who avoided sports in first year like the plague and still gets the shivers when someone says the word PE, trust me, anyone can try.

The Brookes Side

0

Michael Pista examines the differences between Oxford University and Oxford Brookes…

Living in the student city of Oxford is such a unique experience. In a place holding two large universities, chaos and activity is expected. However, the life of a Brookes student – campus, home, social – is slightly different to the life of an Oxford University student. Although we share a similar environment, your culture and our daily lives differ.

In relation to our schedules and how we spend our time on campus, I suspect it’s unlike that of an Oxford University student. At Brookes, our courses are typically taught in lectures, then solidified in seminars. Our lectures are usually two hours long and used for introducing, explaining and exploring new content. This is done in large groups with minimal participation. Most of the time, seminars come right after lectures, and they last for about an hour. Here we are in smaller groups discussing the content learned, exploring it further, and clarifying things where needed. This is an opportunity for us to dig deeper and interact with the content, as well as with each other. This structure works well and manages to effectively teach difficult topics and concepts. 

On a normal week, we can expect four days on campus, with a lecture and seminar on each day. Occasionally, as a part of certain courses, workshops require attendance. This would usually be an opportunity to work on more practical skills. For example, a ‘communication skills for lawyers’ workshop is required as part of the Law LLB course, where practical court etiquette is taught. As Brookes students, we are fortunate enough to have a dedicated bus route with Oxford Buses (U5). This service is free to all Brookes undergraduates, and is a lifesaver all year round in terms of saving time and money. 

While on campus, there is also plenty to do. One of our greatest features is access to modern sporting facilities such as pitches, courts and gyms. These facilities are available to Brookes students at all times, for free or for just a small fee. Going to the gym on campus can save almost £15 every month when compared to other memberships in the area.

Term-time home life has proved to be a positive experience for Brookes students as well. We have a selection of university and private company accommodations available to us. Typically they are in the areas of Headington and Cowley, as these are close to the campus. Luckily,most of the student accommodation also falls on our free bus route, resulting in incredibly convenient, free travel to campus or town. Furthermore, Oxford Brookes provides affordable houses for students in the same areas. The prices are fair and facilities are of high quality- no complaints.

One thing we may have in common is that after hard work comes a hard party. Oxford is one of the best student cities in the UK, and caters to us in endless ways. The diversity of food and drinks, and entertainment is one of the best things about it. Our favourite restaurants include European cuisine such as ‘Moya’ just by St Clements,or Nepalese cuisine such as ‘Yeti’ in Cowley. For some well-priced and deserved drinks, the ‘Swan and Castle’ is a regular, in addition to smaller and cosier pubs such as the ‘Corner House’ in Headington. When on a bigger mission, and celebrating hard, visits to clubs such as ‘Atik’ and ‘The Bridge’  are a must. These are amazing nightclubs right in the heart of Oxford, that are loved by us all. When the party’s over, making use of the parks and greenery around Oxford is essential. Among our favourites definitely has to be ‘South Park’, or the ‘Shotover Country Park’. These make for great walks and talks, and are definitely popular among the Brookes students living in the surrounding areas. As well as this, we all make sure to make use of the brilliant museums such as the ‘Ashmolean’, and other attractions such as the ‘Botanical Gardens’, which are all free to us students. Not to forget, visiting the ‘New Theatre’ and catching a show has also proved to have been fantastic. A breathtaking tribute to ‘Pink Floyd’ was on just before the new year, and it was the best £30 spent!

Living in Oxford as a Brookes student is very pleasant and (most of the time) trouble-free. The city is incredibly well adapted for all the students that live there, and our universities act as great support.

Despite holding two large, very different universities, everything is in order. While our learning environment and methods may perhaps differ, I suspect our social lives are very similar. After all, every student is always on a hunt for a bargain and fun university memories.